1 edit
...but not animals, spiritually speaking?
This is not a rhetorical question.
Obviously this question is directed toward any who think it is not OK to eat animals.
Some animals are barely distinguishable from some plants. It there a distinction we should look for? Someone said not to eat anything that has a face. That seems self-centered. I'm not being facetious, and am not mocking. Do not plants exhibit behaviors of self-preservation? What justifies us to prioritize our self-preservation above theirs? I have done much to help a Bonsai-ed Japanese maple survive, even an earthquake that knocked it off a railing and broke its pot.
I am sincere in this question, because I don't think the spiritual distinction between eating animals and plants has been explored. Maybe it can be easily answered.
Please do not appeal to scriptural or other authority, or warnings of punishment. They don't work for me.
2 edits
Originally posted by JS357Many plants(fruits) depend on being eaten as part of their self-preservation.
...but not animals, spiritually speaking?
This is not a rhetorical question.
Obviously this question is directed toward any who think it is not OK to eat animals.
Some animals are barely distinguishable from some plants. It there a distinction we should look for? Someone said not to eat anything that has a face. That seems self-centered. I'm not being t appeal to scriptural or other authority, or warnings of punishment. They don't work for me.
The real crime is using toilets instead of squatting and plopping it out in some soil!
Also, I would be loathe, spiritually, to kill any plant that does not plan on being eaten. I don't chop down trees and don't use weed killing chemicals in my yard.
Originally posted by JS357Please do not appeal to scriptural or other authority, or warnings of punishment. They don't work for me.
...but not animals, spiritually speaking?
This is not a rhetorical question.
Obviously this question is directed toward any who think it is not OK to eat animals.
Some animals are barely distinguishable from some plants. It there a distinction we should look for? Someone said not to eat anything that has a face. That seems self-centered. I'm not being ...[text shortened]... t appeal to scriptural or other authority, or warnings of punishment. They don't work for me.
why should it be subject to what merely works for you? If you want to know what
others think why are you acting like a prism?
1 edit
Originally posted by JS357An animal is a sentient being.
...but not animals, spiritually speaking?
This is not a rhetorical question.
Obviously this question is directed toward any who think it is not OK to eat animals.
Some animals are barely distinguishable from some plants. It there a distinction we should look for? Someone said not to eat anything that has a face. That seems self-centered. I'm not being t appeal to scriptural or other authority, or warnings of punishment. They don't work for me.
It feels pain and become fearful.
It bleeds and cares for its young.
If you have to ask this question then -------! and fool.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI'm just disclosing what is the case. You don't have to honor the request.
Please do not appeal to scriptural or other authority, or warnings of punishment. They don't work for me.
why should it be subject to what merely works for you? If you want to know what
others think why are you acting like a prism?
Originally posted by JS357sure thing, i suppose in retrospect you are correct in setting up parameters in order to
I'm just disclosing what is the case. You don't have to honor the request.
guide the conversation in a way that you shall find fulfilling. I apologise for my
cumbersome approach.
Originally posted by DasaOK so that's your answer. It is a form of empathy -- based on similarities? not imputed to plants. No need for "fool." I would not impute such things to my Japanese maple, yet I would be sad if my replanting of it didn't work out.
An animal is a sentient being.
It feels pain and become fearful.
It bleeds and cares for its young.
If you have to ask this question then -------! and fool.
I thought another answer would be that we can harvest foods from plants without killing the plants. Similarly to milk? (eggs? fertilized eggs?) from animals. But apparently you would condone the eating of a plant even when eating that plant terminates its life, such as a whole mushroom (is a mushroom a plant?). Also, if we could breed an animal that wasn't sentient, didn't feel pain, become fearful, or care for its young, according to you it would be OK to eat. So I guess eggs, roe, etc. are OK to eat if harvested properly.
1 edit
Originally posted by JS357it's not okay to kill plants or animals, but until we figure out how to get energy by photosynthesis, we're going to keep doing what needs to be done to survive, which includes everything from murdering plants and animals to destroying entire communities of living things.
...but not animals, spiritually speaking?
This is not a rhetorical question.
Obviously this question is directed toward any who think it is not OK to eat animals.
Some animals are barely distinguishable from some plants. It there a distinction we should look for? Someone said not to eat anything that has a face. That seems self-centered. I'm not being t appeal to scriptural or other authority, or warnings of punishment. They don't work for me.
Originally posted by tomtom232Are you one of those "tree huggers".
Many plants(fruits) depend on being eaten as part of their self-preservation.
The real crime is using toilets instead of squatting and plopping it out in some soil!
Also, I would be loathe, spiritually, to kill any plant that does not plan on being eaten. I don't chop down trees and don't use weed killing chemicals in my yard.
